Could you tell me what this is?

Could anyone be so kind as to tell me what the line across the building is? Is it the dreaded banding? Some weird artifact of light effect?

Am I pixel-peeping? I simply don't know... and my brain tells me this is not a problem, only a weird effect of light in the dark. <p>Here is

the offending pic<p><center><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3424/3952643656_d0fdeef22b_o.jpg"></center><p>The line I am referring to is a little above the treetops, in the center, straight up from the shining street light. It cuts the building horizontally (and faintly).<p> For your info, the

shot was done with a Nikon AF-S 24-70, at ISO 6400, with 0.7 of overexposure. <p>Thanks in advance¡

<p>it's too "faint" i can't see it. of course there is a great chance their my aging set of eyes.<br>

maybe a crop will help.</p>

<p>Apower or phone line maybe looks like it fades out at the trees on either side.</p>

<p>Looks like the windows in the building..you can see them clearly when the lights are on inside but the rest going down dont have lights on inside so it looks like dark streaks. Do you see what I am talking about?</p>

<p>The line is visible with the gamma or brightness boosted on a copy of the photo. It corresponds with the streetlight midway along the far right edge. I can also see faint horizontal lines projecting outward from the other street lights lower and toward the middle of the photo, but they aren't as obvious.</p>

<p>This issue (pertaining to the D700) was discussed a few months ago here on the Nikon Forum. See <a href="00TTdv">this thread from May of this year</a> .</p>

<p>Its the windows of the building. I will put money on this one!! lol</p>

<p>Oh nevermind..now I see what you are talking about! lol..I need sleep, ignore me.</p>

<p>This edited version of Francisco's photo appears to illustrate what he's referring to. The red carats point to the horizontal band in line with the street light at the far right margin.</p><div></div>

<p>It's so faint I could hardly see it without the enhancement. I'd say you are pixel peeping, I find the shot perfectly acceptable.</p>

<p>Not that faint... I saw it right away. Would seem to be a streak from that light on the right. But others have pointed this out already...<br>

It also looks like there's a reflection off the rear-element of that one bright light near the base of the building... look in the dark sky to the right of the building.</p>

<p>yep, that looks like banding to me. bet you wouldn't see it if you'd turn down ISO and shot a longer exposure -- but you know that. i've seen the same thing, and it usually manifests in conditions like this, where you're really pushing it in low light. i don't think your D700 is broken.</p>

Thanks, folks. I imagined it was the result of pushing my luck with the camera. In fact, in PSE, when I apply the Auto

Levels the line disappears. But then, since I don't always agree with the automated criteria of that software, I simply

wanted to confirm what I suspected: this may be an effect of the weird light.

 

I did a similar version of this photograph in film (Scala), with my F5. Let's see what happens.

 

I'll take a look at the May thread.

 

Very, very much obliged and thankful for your kind replies....

<blockquote>

<p>It's so faint...</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>might be a good idea if some of you check their monitor(settings)</p>

<p>thanks, lex.<br>

calibration for sure for some of us, ton.</p>

<p>Francisco -<br>

I immediately saw what you were referring to. Only time I get those is when I do some far too drastic post processing with my D70 IR. Did you do something like that?</p>

Did you have a UV filter over the lens, at night they can produce Ghosting and weird effects.

<p>Yep... there's an UV filter on the lens. In fact, there's one on all of my lenses. <br>

I recall having noticed a strange phenomenon in a Leica Summicron 50mm years ago: a candle-lit scene with some type of reflection that rendered a double flame. I blamed it on the filter.<br>

Thanks for taking the time to analyze my shot. At least it's not the camera (which I just finished paying last month).</p>

<p>When I was researching the purchase of my first DSLR (D300) last year on photo.net I recall reading that a UV filter is not needed on a digital camera like with a film camera. With film, I always put a UV filter on every lens purchased. First, to filter out the UV and second, to protect the lens.</p>

<p>The recommendation was to use a clear/protection filter on digital.</p>

<p>Mark</p>